Visual field assessment in glaucoma: comparative evaluation of manual kinetic Goldmann perimetry and automated static perimetry

Indian J Ophthalmol. 2000 Dec;48(4):301-6.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the detection and assessment of progression of visual field defects in primary open-angle glaucoma with manual suprathreshold perimetry on Goldmann perimeter and automated static threshold perimetry on Humphery visual field (HVF) analyzer.

Methods: 105 eyes of 54 patients of primary open-angle glaucoma were followed up with 3-monthly perimetry on Goldmann perimeter and HVF analyzer, for a period of 9 months.

Results: HVF analyzer picked up visual field defects in 48 (46%) eyes whereas Goldmann perimeter picked up visual field defects in 26 (25%) eyes. HVF analyzer demonstrated progression in 14 eyes whereas Goldmann perimeter detected progression in 7 eyes during follow up of 9 months.

Conclusions: HVF analyzer is superior to Goldmann perimeter to document and to demonstrate progression of visual field defects in primary open-angle glaucoma.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Electronic Data Processing*
  • Female
  • Glaucoma, Open-Angle / diagnosis
  • Glaucoma, Open-Angle / physiopathology*
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Severity of Illness Index
  • Visual Field Tests / methods*
  • Visual Fields* / physiology